For first time ever, US billionaires pay lower tax rate than workers

A new book-length study on the tax burden of the ultrarich begins with a startling finding: In 2018, for the first time in history, America's richest billionaires paid a lower effective tax rate than the working class.

"The Triumph of Injustice," by economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman of the University of California at Berkeley, presents a first-of-its kind analysis of Americans' effective tax rates since the 1960s. It finds that in 2018 the average effective tax rate paid by the richest 400 families in the country was 23 per cent, a full percentage point lower than the 24.2 per cent rate paid by the bottom half of American households.

In 1980, by contrast, the 400 richest had an effective tax rate of 47 per cent. In 1960, their tax rate was as high as 56 per cent. The effective tax rate paid by the bottom 50 per cent, by contrast, has changed little over time.

The tipping point came in 2017 with the passage of Donald Trump's tax cuts. They were a windfall for the wealthy.

The analysis differs from many other published estimates of tax burdens by encompassing the totality of taxes Americans pay: not just federal income taxes but also corporate taxes, as well as taxes paid at the state and local levels. It also includes the burden of about $US250 billion of what Saez and Zucman call "indirect taxes," such as licenses for motor vehicles and businesses.

The analysis, which was the subject of a column in The New York Times on Monday, is also notable for the detailed breakdown of the tax burden of not just the top 1 per cent but also the top 0.1 per cent, the top 0.01 per cent and the 400 richest households.

The focus on the ultrarich is necessary, Saez and Zucman write, because those households control a disproportionate share of national wealth: The top 400 families have more wealth than the bottom 60 per cent of households, while the top 0.1 per cent own as much as the bottom 80 per cent. The top 400 families are a "natural reference point," Zucman says, because the IRS publishes information on the top 400 taxpayers as a group, and other sources, such as Forbes, track the fortunes of the 400 wealthiest Americans.

The relatively small tax burden of the super-rich is the product of decades of choices made by American politicians, some deliberate, others the result of indecisiveness or inertia, Saez and Zucman say. Congress has repeatedly slashed top income tax rates, for instance, and cut taxes on capital gains and estates. Politicians have also failed to provide adequate funding for IRS enforcement efforts and allowed multinational companies to shelter their profits in low-tax countries.

Trump's tipping point
But the tipping point came in 2017, with the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That bill, championed by President Donald Trump and then-House Speaker Paul Ryan, was a windfall for the wealthy: It lowered the top income tax bracket and slashed the corporate tax rate.

By 2018, according to Saez and Zucman, the rich were already enjoying the fruits of that legislation: The average effective tax rate paid by the top 0.1 per cent of households dropped by 2.5 percentage points. The benefits the bill's supporters promised - higher rates of growth and business investment and a shrinking deficit - have largely failed to materialise.

Not all economists accept Saez and Zucman's analysis. It is based in part on their previous work, along with French economist Thomas Piketty, on the distribution of wealth and income in American society. Other economists have generated estimates of that distribution that show smaller disparities between the country's haves and have-nots. Saez, Zucman and Piketty have defended their research and maintain that their methods are the most accurate.

On the question of tax burdens, Jason Furman, an economics professor at Harvard who chaired the White House Council of Economic Advisers under President Barack Obama, noted that Saez and Zucman did not include refundable tax credits, such as the earned-income tax credit (EITC), in their analysis.

The credit, which is intended to encourage low-income families to work, "is part of the tax code," Furman said. A person who paid $US1,000 in federal income taxes and then received a $US1,500 credit would have a total federal tax burden of minus $US500, but Furman said that under Saez and Zucman's analysis, that person would instead show a burden of $US0. That result would make total tax burdens at the lower end of the income spectrum appear higher than they actually are.

"The best estimates indicate that the tax system is progressive - with the rich paying a higher tax rate than everyone else," Furman said.

Zucman countered that his and Saez's analysis considers the EITC and other credits like it as transfers of income, akin to food stamps or jobless benefits, rather than tax provisions.

"If you start counting some transfers as negative taxes, it is not clear where to stop," he said via email. "Do you treat the EITC as a negative tax? Veterans' benefits? Medicaid? defense spending? . . . There's no clear line, and the results become arbitrary."

There is general agreement among economists, however, that the tax burden of the rich has fallen considerably in recent decades.

"The rich definitely pay less in taxes than they did in the past and less than they should," Furman said.

Popular Posts

A 10-year-old girl has successfully delivered a bouncing baby girl at a hospital in Benue State, Nigeria.The young girl delivered a healthy baby who weighs 2.5kg at the Foundation Memorial Hospital, Makurdi, Benue State in Nigeria. The 10-year-old girl identified as Masenengen Targba had to undergo a cesarean delivery due to the size of the pelvis.However, according to sources, the young girl is an orphan who was raped continuously and was d*umped at the premises of the hospital when she was in labor.With the help of the Dr Ijoko and Dr Yima, Masenengen Targba delivered safely and both mother and child are out of danger.

Whether you call it Black girl magic, Black excellence or just pure grit, Dr. Venita Simpson has it! This past weekend she became the first Black woman to complete Neurosurgery residency at Baylor College of Medicine since the program began in 1956. While Simpson didn’t expect to make history, she has envisioned herself as a doctor since she was a little girl.“I was inspired to go into medicine since I was seven-years-old after I had surgery. I was just amazed at all the gadgets in the hospital. I fell in love with Neurosurgery after witnessing Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson’s Disease and movement disorders and how life changing a seamless placement of electrodes in the brain could alter and enhance someone’s life,” Simpson told Because of them We Can.In 1981 Dr. Alexa Canady became the first Black woman and the first woman neurosurgeon in the United States. 38 years later Black women make up less than 1% of the population of neurosurgeons in the country. Which is why Simpson’s s…

A c*ourt in the town of Rochefort, western France has found a cock not guilty for crowing louder in its community.Some neighbors in the community failed a laws*uit against the cock of one Mrs. Corinne Fesseau named Maurice in July, complaining about the bird’s unending loud crowing, saying it was giving them inconvenience.According to the neighbors through their lawyer identified as Vincent Huberdeau are seeking that the cou*rt tells Mrs. Corinne Fesseau to either vacate the neighborhood or make sure her cock becomes silent so they can enjoy their stay in the community.However, the lawyer for the cock Julien Papineau defended it saying Maurice crow was a God-given right to which the co*urt agreed with him.According to the defendant, no other residents complained about Maurice’s crowing except for a couple of retired summer vacationers.Reports say a Judge on Thursday rejected the complainants’ relief which means that the cock can feel free and crow as loud as it pleases.Julien Papineau …